On Fri, Jan 11, 2002 at 05:05:42PM -0600, Richard Cobbe wrote:
| Lo, on Thursday, January 10, dman did write:
|
| SNIP
|
| One minor nit to pick from an otherwise very good explanation (and I
| wouldn't bother, except that I've been bitten by this before).
|
| This directive tells exim to use
On Thu, Jan 10, 2002 at 09:38:44PM -0500, Jeremy L. Gaddis wrote:
If you're on a dialup link, why don't you use your
ISP's mail server as a smart host? Let them take
care of your mail delivery.
Which is great unless one of your ISP's smarthosts is misconfigured and
sends a non-fully-qualified
On Fri, Jan 11, 2002 at 12:02:12AM -0500, Brenda J. Butler wrote:
| Well, I had two drivers in the ROUTERS section, and smarthost
| was second with a route_list whose match-this-pattern was
| *. I moved it above lookuphost and it seems to work. Let's
| see if it keeps working and doesn't break
On Fri, Jan 11, 2002 at 11:00:06AM -0500, dman wrote:
On Fri, Jan 11, 2002 at 12:02:12AM -0500, Brenda J. Butler wrote:
| Received: from bjb by seal with local (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian))
| id 16OtJ9-0004QT-00; Thu, 10 Jan 2002 23:28:47 -0500
| Received: from seal ([EMAIL PROTECTED]
At 17:00 11.01.02, dman wrote:
On Fri, Jan 11, 2002 at 12:02:12AM -0500, Brenda J. Butler wrote:
...
| Received: from unknown (HELO machine.remailer.address) (206.99.235.25)
| by samaria.achilles.net with SMTP; 11 Jan 2002 04:30:36 -
I'd say that your ISP has its 'doze machine
On Fri, Jan 11, 2002 at 11:33:33AM -0500, Brenda J. Butler wrote:
| On Fri, Jan 11, 2002 at 11:00:06AM -0500, dman wrote:
| Now I'm curious as to what [EMAIL PROTECTED] really means -- there
| is no domain remailer.address :
|
| I also can't find any name for that machine.remailer.address
also sprach dman [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2002.01.11.1700 +0100]:
Nex the system web30.achilles.net received the message vis ESMTP from
a host who said it was 'seal' in the EHLO command, but whose IP is
209.151.2.114 which resolves to [EMAIL PROTECTED] (I
didn't think the @ was legal in a hostname
also sprach dman [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2002.01.11.1859 +0100]:
Actually, you're kinda lucky that achilles.net accepted the forwarded
message since the headers indicate that an unknown hostname was in the
HELO. They could have denied it just as martin's system did to your
debian box. (I assume
also sprach Volker Gerstenkorn [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2002.01.11.1843 +0100]:
Advanced users also need Received: headers to track down spammers. Bad
luck if an open relay doesn't log IP addresses of senders.
so then you take the relay's IP and blacklist them with rfc-ignorant.org
or any of the RBL
On Fri, Jan 11, 2002 at 10:38:07PM +0100, martin f krafft wrote:
| also sprach dman [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2002.01.11.1859 +0100]:
| Actually, you're kinda lucky that achilles.net accepted the forwarded
| message since the headers indicate that an unknown hostname was in the
| HELO. They could
also sprach dman [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2002.01.11.2336 +0100]:
Right (though I feel that SMTP clients incapable of SMTP are just
plain wrong). However the ISP can restrict the hosts (ips) it allows
the bad FQHNs from to be just the IPs it offers to customers.
yes, that's a good way to do it.
Lo, on Thursday, January 10, dman did write:
SNIP
One minor nit to pick from an otherwise very good explanation (and I
wouldn't bother, except that I've been bitten by this before).
This directive tells exim to use that name as the hostname in the SMTP
greeting (HELO/EHLO) instead of that
On Thu, Jan 10, 2002 at 07:39:16PM -0500, Brenda J. Butler wrote:
| On Thu, Jan 10, 2002 at 07:06:59PM -0500, Mail Delivery System wrote:
|[EMAIL PROTECTED]:
| SMTP error from remote mailer after RCPT TO:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:
| host mail.madduck.net [195.226.187.154]:
| 504 seal:
If you're on a dialup link, why don't you use your
ISP's mail server as a smart host? Let them take
care of your mail delivery.
j.
--
Jeremy L. Gaddis [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-Original Message-
From: Brenda J. Butler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2002 7:39 PM
To:
also sprach Brenda J. Butler [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2002.01.11.0139 +0100]:
I don't have a domain. My isp has one but I don't. My
FQHN is seal (and it's not visible from the internet anyway).
it's not FQHN then ;)
FQ is fully-qualified, which requires a top-level domain.
why not just make
also sprach Jeremy L. Gaddis [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2002.01.11.0338 +0100]:
If you're on a dialup link, why don't you use your
ISP's mail server as a smart host? Let them take
care of your mail delivery.
that would be the proper way of doing it. or to get a dynamic host
name...
--
martin;
also sprach dman [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2002.01.11.0342 +0100]:
220 dman.ddts.net ESMTP Exim 3.33 #1 Thu, 10 Jan 2002 21:29:31 -0500
HELO my host name
250 dman.ddts.net Hello dman at dman.ddts.net [127.0.0.1]
MAIL FROM: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
250 [EMAIL PROTECTED] is syntactically correct
RCPT TO:
On Thu, Jan 10, 2002 at 09:42:28PM -0500, dman wrote:
Clearly you are not using your ISPs system as a smarthost, but have
setup exim to deliver directly to the remote system. What you need to
Aha, correct. I think I'd like to use my isp as a smarthost.
However, I have messed with my exim
also sprach Brenda J. Butler [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2002.01.11.0511 +0100]:
Aha, correct. I think I'd like to use my isp as a smarthost.
However, I have messed with my exim configuration and now I'm
afraid to change it.
it's quite an easy change. i'll let you figure it out though ;)
the
On Thu, Jan 10, 2002 at 11:11:23PM -0500, Brenda J. Butler wrote:
| On Thu, Jan 10, 2002 at 09:42:28PM -0500, dman wrote:
| Clearly you are not using your ISPs system as a smarthost, but have
| setup exim to deliver directly to the remote system. What you need to
|
| Aha, correct. I think I'd
On Fri, Jan 11, 2002 at 05:33:50AM +0100, martin f krafft wrote:
| Expect questions.
|
| dman! dman, wake up! dman!
grin It's time for bed here. 11:51pm local time. (are you just
getting up for work martin?)
-D
--
In the way of righteousness there is life;
along that path is
On Thu, Jan 10, 2002 at 11:11:23PM -0500, Brenda J. Butler wrote:
On Thu, Jan 10, 2002 at 09:42:28PM -0500, dman wrote:
Clearly you are not using your ISPs system as a smarthost, but have
setup exim to deliver directly to the remote system. What you need to
Aha, correct. I think I'd like
also sprach Brenda J. Butler [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2002.01.11.0602 +0100]:
So machine.remailer.address thinks it is getting the message from
web30.achilles.net which can be resolved: should this be sufficient?
Or is the next Received header (Received: from unknown...) trying
to tell me
@lists.debian.org
Subject: Re: Yow, Madduck!
also sprach Jeremy L. Gaddis [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2002.01.11.0338
+0100]:
If you're on a dialup link, why don't you use your
ISP's mail server as a smart host? Let them take
care of your mail delivery.
that would be the proper way of doing it. or to get a dynamic
24 matches
Mail list logo
